Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    February 28, 2014 11:00pm-11:31pm PST

11:00 pm
shadinger street there's a knock out most of the fourth floor is set back except there's a closet in the backroom knock that back to be consistent with the rest of the fourth floor >> is it going to be the computer overhead up. >> yeah. that one is - we'll figure that out. >> could you not step back. >> yeah. >> it impacts on slatinger street and gives the fourth story wall other than that, i think it's well done for this size of a house which is not huge on a small lot. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yeah. i think the lot is
11:01 pm
usual but we have a lot it's horizontal to the street rather than going back perpendicular that present an issue for the architect to accommodate the program. i don't think that i mean they're not - i don't see the argument it encroaches on the house it's on the street and their reciprocating i retaining most of the yard to the west i guess it is. so the footprint of the house isn't that much greater than what's been there curling currently but in terms of the
11:02 pm
location i'm sure they're coming east and taking out an open parking space but that's about, you know, with that their pretty much footprint size. height wise if it's at the 38 feet i don't have much of an issue. the design to lower the ground floor about a half a story to accommodate you know that height limit is a good idea. and so i don't have a lot of issues with that >> commissioner antonini. >> well, i would make a motion to continue for a month to the 27 of march for two reasons we're short two commissioners but most importantly there
11:03 pm
hadn't been a lot of dialog between the project sponsor and the neighbors. while it motive not change 6th i want to here the issue of the height which may or may not be appropriate the issue the design it will give both parties a chance to talk and with the absence of commissioners it's hard to try to do that while we're in hearing. that's my motion >> commissioner sugaya. >> i might, i want to ask the project sponsor the issue of meeting with the neighbors. the neighbors have presented their characterstion of what
11:04 pm
didn't happen and that process >> thank you for the opportunity i've lived direct across the street and seen a blighted house the whole time. from february of last year. your phone numbers and architect information has been known from february of 2013 we've seen 1 inquire the architect and myself and came from one gentleman to support our project. the first time we learned of opposition a gentleman informed us of a meeting where this lady
11:05 pm
brought an architect bruce and retired zoning administrator bob. from that point forward there was no request to meet with us. we were instructed to meet with the community activist. i want to remind you i live cross the street from magnetically and live 55 feet they know who i am and my wife i've been there for 10 years. we're available and never approached or contacted >> where were you contacted by the community board. >> i was. >> and you refused to moot.
11:06 pm
>> the community board reached out to us after the discretionary review was brought up. we were told you that the fourth floor needed to come offend of story. i spoke multiple times with the gentleman at the community board and told him the story and his recommendation was meet with us the planning commission wants to hear that there's no resolution in my chambers. we only would have met with him to say we've met with him and that's disingenuous >> maybe for you but the commission has always encouraged. >> i understand.
11:07 pm
>> no matter what the outcome or the perception is on both sides. >> i went are respect having that from february of 2013 for 9 months nobody spoke to us. >> i understand. is there - administrator sanchez. i'm prepared to act p on that today but if that's the pleasure of the commission to meet later. this was a substandard law and there are no conditions additional conditions as we might not include today for such requests. there is no additional restrictions on that. we had some public comments to the law and also had the public
11:08 pm
speak to a variance should be granted in reality it's the only way to get the project on this lot. there are clearly we can make finding to justify the variances but it comes down to a question of the complete size of the building and it seems like the issue is the fourth story. looking at the flooring plans it's maximizing what they can there's not alleged space. today we're looking at plans that include bars and jimdz and entertainment rooms. those are things people file variances for. i respect their genuine in coming down with the home if the
11:09 pm
fourth floor were to the removed that would have an impact on the amount of bedrooms currently it's only the master bedroom and bath and closet but we'll see the loss of at least one possibly 2 bedrooms and so i think that's my concern so as commissioner hillis was noting are there any ways of mass aging the additional envelope. so certainly any decision i may take on a variance this commission has the ability and has been more erotic so if i were to consider a variance to require a portion of the rear
11:10 pm
yard you could be more restrictive >> thank you commissioner antonini. >> yeah. for the benefit of the project sponsor and the dr requesters you'll know this just because a dr has been filed many time we suggest to parties dr requesters and project sponsored to meet and there are instances they workout their issues and the dr is dropped. we're not talking about merely the fourth floor there was a whole laundry list that was brought up and some which it is designed and there maybe ways to make this acceptable to the dr requesters and keep part of the fourth floor so that's the reason why additional dialog
11:11 pm
westbound constructive. >> commissioner hillis. >> i'm certainly not intense more discussions but i think we've seen the difference so i'm going to take dr and reduce the closet from 4 inches and scare off the fourth floor. you know, and approve the project >> commissioners there are two motions on the floor i've not heard a second to either. >> i'll make a motion. >> commissioner moore. >> i was very carefully listening to what mr. sanchez
11:12 pm
said the variance is not about height it's a compliant building on a lot which don't in the inn the way the building sits on the side creates any boobldz that are not there and it pretty much replicates. i believe that reducing the closet as an architecture element that pops out and creates more vertical massing is a great idea but don't believe that tinkering with the house is compact for large rooms i don't think there's a lot of fluff in
11:13 pm
there. does the downstairs have a deny yeah, you need some room other than the living room and kitchen so there is is tv room in some homes this one is relatively compassionate and tight and doesn't leave room for interpretation. i'm trying to verbalize that the disagreement between the neighbors and many of them and the applicant is not a typical. it's usual for the code. we see reaction in all neighborhoods and sometimes, it plays out arbitrate more where people accuse each other of bad
11:14 pm
things. there is is disagreement about height but since the building is tucked in a way i don't have a sense this building is trying to be ostentatious. it's clear and i personally do not think we need to take dr except for the point made in commissioner hilliss comments. i'm in support of the project and i'm ready to move on it >> let me convicting add a couple of comments. i was pleased to hear the comments. this is an unusual case and i think that's a teeny lot trying to get a full-size house on
11:15 pm
that. i don't have a problem with the design it's a good attempt. but, you know, it is trying to squeeze not grossly but trying to squeeze a large house on a small lot. i understand there's glitch to the outreach and compulsion and the timing of things it's not open memorandum but that's a concern to see so many folks out here. i'm concerned if the teeny house built on a teeny lot would have opposition at all. to be honest i'm torn on this one but keep the conversation. commissioner antonini >> maybe i having can ask the architect i'm trying to picture what this looks like.
11:16 pm
i'm looking at the rendering on page 3. now do the windows have volumes are they french windows or solid glass i can't tell >> no mullins. >> their proportional. >> many seems to be double hung but they have mullins they midline. >> on shard they don't have mullins. >> the commissioner said this is not the case - every single house is different on the street in design style. so, you know, the idea of
11:17 pm
putting a house in there that's of a more modern vocabulary that's how the economy grows >> i don't want to object but a what kind of siding it's stained? >> yes. >> we don't know the color. >> probably a darker color. >> and why is that one window larger than other. >> that's true a modern take on a bay window. it is appropriately sized to be a bay window according to section 136 of the code >> i appreciate your comments and thank you.
11:18 pm
i mean, i just don't, you know, care for contemporary architecture awhile all the houses are different they are different in the context of the time they're built. you know, they seem to blend in more although you're making the efforts >> the vindicate ran was built in 1980 and now there are other. >> they could use accountabilities in the neighborhood. there are those kind of relationships from house-to-house to house >> okay. thank you. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yeah. i'm in favor of the project but it bothers me it failed. we don't get the he said he said
11:19 pm
but after one complication e application meeting nothing happened and it appears the spokesperson was a little bit reticent and not ready to meet and doesn't acknowledge the community because whatever was not going to happen there and that's not the reason to have the process to i think community boards to have a purpose they should be utilized and hopefully something would have happened. i don't know the chairman but his comment was inappropriate to say the project would fail anyway. but i'll vote for it. i agree with some of the commissioners the design is if
11:20 pm
that and i don't have a problem with the house but don't come back her when your teenagers are trying to jam into a bathroom >> there is a second and motion on the floor to reduce the bathroom commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis. commissioner sugaya and president fong >so moved with commissioner antonini voting against. commissioners that places you on >> - excuse me. closing the public comments that will all the commissioner and discretionary review anyone who wants a copy of the document
11:21 pm
please contact the staff. >> commissioners that places you on general public comment there are no speaker cards. >> okay there are no public comments so meeting is adjourned.
11:22 pm
11:23 pm
11:24 pm
11:25 pm
11:26 pm
11:27 pm
11:28 pm
11:29 pm
11:30 pm